Lol I looked at all of them and could only see a difference between Dragon Age, and that was a tiny difference. Can people actually see these apparent differences?
Lol I looked at all of them and could only see a difference between Dragon Age, and that was a tiny difference. Can people actually see these apparent differences?locopatho
I didn't notice anything UNTIL i read what game spot said,and even then i only noticed it for 2 of the games :|
Lol I looked at all of them and could only see a difference between Dragon Age, and that was a tiny difference. Can people actually see these apparent differences?locopatho
No but fanboys take ammo where they can take it. Thats all its used for.
They could take the screenshots from the same version with different brightness settings and noone would be the wiser. Consolites sit 2 miles away from their tellys anyway and couldn't tell the difference even if there was one. These comparisons are what's wrong with this gen, like two retarted identical twins fighting over who's prettier.
Lol I looked at all of them and could only see a difference between Dragon Age, and that was a tiny difference. Can people actually see these apparent differences?locopatho
I found it very easy to notice the differences--though they are definitely negligible. They are noticeable to me none-the-less.
smae old,same old, people should know by now that traditional coding techniques favour the 360's traditional architecture, not so good for the PS3 as this gen is more about multiplats than it is exclusives
Minor differences but its pretty noticable that 360 does textures better. I think it only matters when their are major problems, for example Dragon age having a slight upperhand on PS3 and Borderlands being better on 360, the reviews suggest this. The worst one however is IGN's latest Bayonetta Review, the 360 version apperently ownz the PS3 version so much that Bayonetta 360 = 9.5 where as Ps3 version = 8.2. Thats a huge difference and suggests developers are having more trouble creating PS3 games.
I can't believe lemmings won't stop this "multiplats are better on the 360" myth. It's total bs, a game like bayonetta, yes it is, and yes it's noticable, all these other multiplays are exactly the same, ones a little darker the other a little lighter... It's really pathetic lems give it up.
Yet some fanboys still think PS3 is more powerfull!! Ohh...the hype :?
Racer850
I think Uncharted 2 and killzone 2 would like a word with you, lol, but seriously this comparison just shows how similar the multiplats look.
Yep, those 2 games look better than anyhing on 360. Yeah.....2 games. When a console is more powerfull than the other one it is visible in every single exclusive and multiplat. It has worked like that in every gen to date.
Anyway, as i allways say, im sure this gen both HD consoles are tecnically even.
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
I'm a little disappointed in all of this. I don't like having to find out which game performs better on each given console. I prefer buying for the ps3, because my 360 is a pre-hdmi model and has RRODed once, but if the game runs smoother on the 360, why should I be doing that? I suppose the issue of reliability comes in. I may not even beable to play some of these games in a year, or so. OR the thought of playing a "classic" in an even longer amount of time, ala n64.......
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
ioannisdenton
I agree the differences are usually minor but still. For a 600 euro console with "teh cell" and Blu Ray and all it's hype that it'd blow the 360 away, for it to be struggling to match 360s multiplats is pretty sad. (and after 3 years on the market for devs to learn PS3s hardware and all...)
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
I agree the differences are usually minor but still. For a 600 euro console with "teh cell" and Blu Ray and all it's hype that it'd blow the 360 away, for it to be struggling to match 360s multiplats is pretty sad. (and after 3 years on the market for devs to learn PS3s hardware and all...) its not about learning its about having the proper dev kits to develop the games which where expensive till september this graphical problem will be a thing of the past. Unless companies just cant program properly *cough* valve *cough*
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
ioannisdenton
not true, the ps3 was the lead platform for ghostbusters, and the game still ended up looking considerably better on the 360 than the PS3 version, it has nothing to do with bad ports, 3rd party devs use traditional coding techniques,,when it comes to coding games in the traditional fashion the ps3 just isn't up to the job
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
I agree the differences are usually minor but still. For a 600 euro console with "teh cell" and Blu Ray and all it's hype that it'd blow the 360 away, for it to be struggling to match 360s multiplats is pretty sad. (and after 3 years on the market for devs to learn PS3s hardware and all...) its not about learning its about having the proper dev kits to develop the games which where expensive till september this graphical problem will be a thing of the past. Unless companies just cant program properly *cough* valve *cough*valve can't program properly? how many games have you made that won 40 GOTY awards in one year, you know gabe newell produced several versions of windows right? and every game valve releases wins at least one award right? come back when you actually know something about valve,
Yet some fanboys still think PS3 is more powerfull!! Ohh...the hype :?
I think Uncharted 2 and killzone 2 would like a word with you, lol, but seriously this comparison just shows how similar the multiplats look.
Yep, those 2 games look better than anyhing on 360. Yeah.....2 games. When a console is more powerfull than the other one it is visible in every single exclusive and multiplat. It has worked like that in every gen to date.
Anyway, as i allways say, im sure this gen both HD consoles are tecnically even.
Being harder to develop for also plays a part in the marginally better looking multiplats. A console can have worse looking multiplats and still be more powerful if if the devs have a harder time developing the game. The two exclusives mentioned show what the PS3 is capable of when tinkered with properly.
[QUOTE="Racer850"] I think Uncharted 2 and killzone 2 would like a word with you, lol, but seriously this comparison just shows how similar the multiplats look.idontbeliveit
Yep, those 2 games look better than anyhing on 360. Yeah.....2 games. When a console is more powerfull than the other one it is visible in every single exclusive and multiplat. It has worked like that in every gen to date.
Anyway, as i allways say, im sure this gen both HD consoles are tecnically even.
Being harder to develop for also plays a part in the marginally better looking multiplats. A console can have worse looking multiplats and still be more powerful if if the devs have a harder time developing the game. The two exclusives mentioned show what the PS3 is capable of when tinkered with properly.it's a shame 3rd party devs don't want to 'tinker' with it properly, but you know what they say,time is money, it makes me laugh how nobody ever blames SONY for deliberately making the ps3 hard to code for
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
Rza_rectah
I agree the differences are usually minor but still. For a 600 euro console with "teh cell" and Blu Ray and all it's hype that it'd blow the 360 away, for it to be struggling to match 360s multiplats is pretty sad. (and after 3 years on the market for devs to learn PS3s hardware and all...) its not about learning its about having the proper dev kits to develop the games which where expensive till september this graphical problem will be a thing of the past. Unless companies just cant program properly *cough* valve *cough*
No it won't. Dropping development kit costs from $10,000 to $2,000 has no effect on studios spending millions to try to create AAA titles. And many of the examples of development issues have occurred in well funded studios. The only thing this will do is attract smaller poorly funded studios. Which is still a good thing.
But, the examples of PS3 games with development problems is prima facia evidence that the problem wasn't the development kit cost.....seeing as those studios bought and used full priced development kits.....which is how they made the PS3 version in first place. Ergo, the problem isn't the cost, it is how you use it.
Yep, those 2 games look better than anyhing on 360. Yeah.....2 games. When a console is more powerfull than the other one it is visible in every single exclusive and multiplat. It has worked like that in every gen to date.
Anyway, as i allways say, im sure this gen both HD consoles are tecnically even.
delta3074
Being harder to develop for also plays a part in the marginally better looking multiplats. A console can have worse looking multiplats and still be more powerful if if the devs have a harder time developing the game. The two exclusives mentioned show what the PS3 is capable of when tinkered with properly.it's a shame 3rd party devs don't want to 'tinker' with it properly, but you know what they say,time is money, it makes me laugh how nobody ever blames SONY for deliberately making the ps3 hard to code for It doesn't always take a lot of time to tinker with it properly. Uncharted 2 is the best looking game on consoles and that was developed in at most two years. I'm not saying Sony shouldn't take any of the blame, but that's not the point. I was giving reasons for why Multiplats are generally marginally better on 360.
[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="idontbeliveit"] Being harder to develop for also plays a part in the marginally better looking multiplats. A console can have worse looking multiplats and still be more powerful if if the devs have a harder time developing the game. The two exclusives mentioned show what the PS3 is capable of when tinkered with properly.idontbeliveit
it's a shame 3rd party devs don't want to 'tinker' with it properly, but you know what they say,time is money, it makes me laugh how nobody ever blames SONY for deliberately making the ps3 hard to code for It doesn't always take a lot of time to tinker with it properly. Uncharted 2 is the best looking game on consoles and that was developed in at most two years. I'm not saying Sony shouldn't take any of the blame, but that's not the point. I was giving reasons for why Multiplats are generally marginally better on 360.yeah, but the guys who coded uncharted 2 had all there dev costs covered by SONY, third party dev's don't, and the only reason UC2 was finished so quick was because they already had the engine there, tell me how long did it take to code the original UC, third party devs don't have 5 years to complete a game, and with the ps3's software attach rate so low, it is not economically viable to take the extra time to bring the PS3 versions of games up to the 360's level, especially when the 360 is the one earning them all the money
Desperate Lemmings :roll: The difference is almost unnoticable. You really think when you play a game you gonna notice an odd particle here n there looking better on 360 than Ps3? Fanboys :roll:
Disturbed123
Desperate lemmings? No... More like desperate cows. Cows are always talking about how the 360 cannot keep up with the PS3, graphically. This is just letting them know that they're wrong, as usual. I know what you're going to say. "But, but, but the PS3 exclusives prove the PS3 is more powerful." How does anyone really know that? I mean, wouldn't the evidence we see in multiplats lean more towards the 360 being to handle those on an equal level, as well? I think so. The only reason cows hide behind exclusives is because there is no way of knowing. I will say, though, that it's almost a given that if KZ2 was made for the 360, it wouldn't have taken as long, and it probably would have been cheaper to make, as well. :) In the end, the fact is both consoles are pretty equal. It's just that the 360 can handle some games better, performance wise.
this is because all the games are MADE for xbox 360 and THEN ported to ps3. but still the differences are minor in 90% of games and you CAN T tell the difference unless gamespot makes a comparison. WOW!!! in the xbox version of AC2 you can see a single better pixel !!! ps3 owned by xbox... get serious please
ioannisdenton
Who has been claiming "ownage" over this? You're imagining things. Stop being so defensive.
Only Dragon Age looks better on PS3, 360 wins every other round, if you can't notice the aliasing, lighting, textures, etc. in those pics, you are blind, plain and simple.
I can't believe lemmings won't stop this "multiplats are better on the 360" myth. It's total bs, a game like bayonetta, yes it is, and yes it's noticable, all these other multiplays are exactly the same, ones a little darker the other a little lighter... It's really pathetic lems give it up.
Eddie-Vedder
Aliasing, shadows, and textures are also noticeably different in these comparisions, I'm not blind either. I even played those PS3 multiplats like Batman AA for example.
Even the article says that the differences are minimal. It's not like PS3-only owners are really missing out on anything when it comes to most multiplats. Almost all of the games Gamespot compared look identical on both consoles.
Log in to comment